billycravens

3 ms·

1.
by billycravens 14y ago
In the same vein, I think it's irrelevant even if affects the Tab 2 10.1. In terms of sales, none of the Tabs are significant to Samsung, relative to phone sales. I know someone can quote great sales numbers, but those tend to be the result
2.
by billycravens 14y ago
That's clever and might work. Of course, I'm no expert on German patent law (nor on US, either, but I'm betting few to none on HN are), but perhaps there's a different standard? I'm wondering if the large encompassing "... embodies any desi
3.
by billycravens 14y ago
Reading the actual injunction suggests that if it looks like the original Galaxy Tab 10.1, it's included in the injunction: "Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, Inc., its
4.
by billycravens 14y ago
It's not clear in the article whether this ruling only applies to the original GT 10.1, and doesn't apply to the GT 2 10.1. My understanding is that it applies to the Galaxy Tab 10.1, all revisions (in the same sense of an injunction agains
5.
by billycravens 14y ago
Can anyone direct me to the new URL for Hacker News? I missed the announcement where this site was converted to Hacker Ads.
6.
by billycravens 15y ago
Operating a device app store with all the bandwidth and infrastructure that's involved is an entirely different creature than adding features to an API.
7.
by billycravens 15y ago
Google charges the same 30%: http://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/bin/a... However, this isn't an apt comparison to what Adobe's doing. Apple, Google, Amazon, etc provide the infrastructure, hosting, payment processing,